FCO Spring Supplementary Estimates

Lord Campbell-Savours: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether they will give details of the Foreign and Commonwealth Office's spring supplementary estimate.

Baroness Amos: Subject to parliamentary approval of any necessary supplementary estimate, the Foreign and Commonwealth Office departmental expenditure limit (DEL) will be increased by £5,611,000 from £1,463,838,000 to £1,469,449,000 and the administration costs limits will be increased by £60,097,000 from £678,042,000 to £738,139,000. Within the DEL change, the impact on resources and capital are as set out in the following table:
	
		
			  Resources Capital 
			 Change 82,706,000 -77,095,000 
			 New DEL 1,401,303,000 68,146,000 
			 Of which:   
			 Voted 1,250,326,000 62,346,000 
			 Non-voted 150,997,000 5,800,000 
		
	
	The change in the resource element of the DEL arises from
	i. A public expenditure survey (PES) transfer to the Department for Transport of £50,000 in respect of the setting up of a register of shipping by the Maritime and Coastguard Agency for certain Caribbean overseas territories.
	ii. A PES transfer to the Ministry of Defence of £183,000 in respect of business rates applicable to the Old Admiralty Building—Citadel formerly paid by the FCO and now the responsibility of the MoD.
	iii. Reclassification of £62,410,000 from capital to resource (administration costs of £56,810,000, grants of £5,600,000) to improve budgetary flexibility.
	iv. A decrease of £11,750,000 in respect of an adjustment for overseas price movements.
	v. An increase in admin costs of £1,630,000 in respect of increases to consular services overseas.
	vi. A transfer from BBC World Service capital to BBC World Service resource of £30,000,000 to facilitate effective management of BBC World Service budgets.
	vii. A PES transfer from the Department of Trade and Industry of £100,000 in respect of Invest UK DTI funded overseas slots at the time of the winter supplementary estimate, details of which were not published at the time.
	viii. A PES transfer to the Department for International Development (DfID) and Ministry of Defence of £2,000,000 and £4,884,000 respectively in respect of the remainder required to fund planned conflict prevention (CP) programme activity to the end of the FY.
	ix. A PES transfer from the CP global programme pool to DfID and the Ministry of Defence of £250,000 and £572,000 respectively in respect of baseline repatriation to departments.
	x. A PES transfer from DfID of £1,450,000 to fund payment to a military officer in Angola, a project management transfer and the FCO's one-third share of the existing CP Africa pool reserve.
	xi. Take up of EYF if £11,531,000 from a combination of underspends on the 2001–02 CP DUP and DfID and FCO CP programme underspends.
	xii. A PES transfer to DfID of £5,000,000 for planned CP programme activities at the time of the winter supplementary estimate, details of which were not published at the time.
	xiii. A PES transfer to the security and intelligence agencies of £225,000 for CP activities at the time of the winter supplementary estimates, details of which were not published at the time.
	xiv. An increase of £499,000 for additional security at posts in the Middle East.
	The change in the capital element of the DEL arises from:
	i. A PES transfer from the Home Office of £515,000 and £264,000 to defray the extra costs to the FCO of setting up visa regimes for Zimbabwe and Jamaica.
	ii. Reclassification of £62,410,000 from capital to resource to improve budgetary flexibility.
	iii. A decrease of £585,000 in respect of an adjustment for overseas price movements.
	iv. A transfer from BBC World Service capital to BBC World Service resource of £30,000,000 to facilitate effective management of BBC World Service budgets.
	v. An increase of £5,121,000 for additional security at posts in the Middle East.
	vi. An increase of £10,000,000 to cover a shortfall in non-operating appropriation in aid in respect of asset recycling.

Bermuda

Lord Campbell-Savours: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether an Order in Council has been made to amend the constitution of Bermuda.

Baroness Amos: On 27 February an Order in Council was made to amend the constitution of Bermuda. This amendment, which has received widespread political support in Bermuda, will change the system of elections to Bermuda's House of Assembly from 20 dual-seat constituencies to 36 single-seat constituencies, as recommended by the Bermuda Constituency Boundaries Commission in its 2002 report.
	The consultation process adopted in deciding upon this amendment has highlighted concerns in Bermuda that there should be a clear and generally acceptable procedure for considering future proposals for constitutional amendment. The Secretary of State wishes to ensure that, subject to the sovereign rights of Her Majesty, the process of considering such proposals is as transparent as possible and that the citizens and political parties of Bermuda are consulted as widely as possible before changes are made. He has therefore asked the Governor to explore the issue locally to see whether interested parties in Bermuda can come forward with acceptable proposals for procedures to be followed in future, which can then be put to him for consideration. These proposals are to include the means by which the public is consulted over proposed constituency boundary changes when a future constituency boundaries commission is undertaking its work. The Secretary of State understands that the Governor plans to canvass suggestions from individuals, political parties and organisations.

Aisha Megrahi

Lord Lamont of Lerwick: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Why Aisha Megrahi has been refused permission to stay in Britain, even though her husband is serving a life sentence in Barlinnie gaol; whether it is normal policy to refuse wives permission to stay in this country when their husbands are imprisoned here; and, if so, whether this is consistent with the European Convention on Human Rights.

Lord Filkin: There are no special arrangements for overseas nationals coming to the United Kingdom (UK) to visit a spouse or other family member who has been imprisoned here. Such applications are considered under the general provisions for visitors as set out in paragraphs 40 and 41 of the Immigration Rules (HC 395). To qualify for entry to the United Kingdom as a visitor an applicant must demonstrate that he or she is genuinely seeking entry as a visitor for the period stated, has sufficient funds for personal support and accommodation, holding any dependants without working or recourse to public funds, and that he or she will leave the United Kingdom at the end of the visit. The maximum period allowed for a visit is normally six months. We do not consider that this policy is inconsistent with the European Convention on Human Rights.

Asylum Seekers: Government Policy

Lord Avebury: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Further to the Answer by Lord Bassam of Brighton on 18 February, whether they can estimate the proportion of asylum seekers whose applications are susceptible to influence by government policy.

Lord Filkin: Government policy is aimed at ensuring we have a firm, fair, fast and effective system, which of course affects all asylum applicants, by dealing with those with genuine claims effectively and efficiently, while also deterring those who seek to abuse the system. We also help a number of those needing humanitarian assistance via specific schemes (e.g. Kosovans assisted under the HEP programme).
	Current policy initiatives, such as juxtaposed controls in France and the deployment of detection technology at continental ports, are designed to prevent those who seek to circumvent our controls at specific ports of entry from doing so. The Government are confident that by September 2003 this will reduce significantly new asylum claims by around half compared with the number last October.

Oakington Asylum Centre

Baroness Blatch: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	How many asylum seekers were accommodated at the Oakington Centre on each day of January.

Lord Filkin: In order to maximise the impact of the non-suspensive appeal provisions, Oakington took, from 7 November 2002, only claimants from the 10 EU accession states (Cyprus, the Czech Republic, Estonia, Hungary, Latvia, Lithuania, Malta, Poland, Slovenia and Slovakia) listed as safe in the Nationality Immigration and Asylum Act 2002. Claims from these countries will be refused and certified as clearly unfounded, generating a non-suspensive appeal (NSA) right, unless my right honourable friend the Home Secretary is satisfied they are not. In these cases, applicants are detained at Oakington for their decision and until removal, unless it is judged necessary to transfer them to secure detention. The daily intake at Oakington was then dependent upon claims from persons entitled to reside in these 10 countries and the impact on this daily intake of this new process was obviously not possible to predict. In fact, the process had an immediate and significant impact: numbers dropped significantly in December 2002 and were low in early January 2003.
	As a result, from 12 January 2003, Oakington has resumed intake from the list of 40 previous nationalities from the Oakington-suitable list. This has enabled us to make best use of Oakington while retaining the flexibility to give absolute priority to the 10 nationalities at present covered by the NSA process, which is to be extended to include the further seven nationalities recently announced.
	Figures for occupancy at Oakington are normally published on a quarterly basis and those for January are not yet available in publishable form. However, at 31 January 2003, locally-held management information shows there to have been 116 detained at the centre on that day.

Asylum Seekers from Iraq

Lord Avebury: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether they have made any estimate of the number of asylum seekers from Iraq who may arrive in the United Kingdom per month following any military operations against Saddam Hussein.

Lord Filkin: A number of Iraqi citizens currently seek asylum in the United Kingdom on a weekly basis. It is not known if the numbers would significantly increase following a conflict in Iraq.

Judicial Appointments

Lord Lester of Herne Hill: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether they will give effect in the United Kingdom to the guidance on judicial appointments contained in Recommendation No R(94)12, adopted by the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe on 11 October 1994, namely that (i) the authority taking the decision on the selection and career of judges should be independent of the government and the administration; (ii) where constitutional or legal provisions or tradition allow judges to be appointed by the government, there should be guarantees to ensure that the procedures to appoint judges are transparent and independent in practice; and (iii) there should be a special independent and competent body to give the government advice which it follows in practice.

Lord Irvine of Lairg: We comply with the recommendation. It is important to read the relevant parts of the text of the recommendation in context and as a whole. The recommendation clearly envisages that the constitutional or legal provisions of some countries allow judges to be appointed by the government. (In England and Wales and Northern Ireland, the Lord Chancellor is responsible for appointing, or advising the Queen on the appointment of, virtually all judges. The most senior appointments are made by the Queen on the recommendation of the Prime Minister following advice provided by the Lord Chancellor.
	The recommendation proposes that in such circumstances there should be guarantees to ensure that the appointment procedures are transparent and independent in practice and will not be influenced by reasons other than merit. One of the examples of such guarantees suggested is that the authority which makes the decision safeguards against undue or improper influences. That guarantee is given effect here by the fact that there is in this country no higher duty of the holder of the office of Lord Chancellor than to ensure from within government that judicial independence is respected and maintained. Futhermore, the procedures for appointing judges are transparent and subject to the scrutiny of the Commissioners for Judicial Appointments covering England and Wales and Northern Ireland.

Iraq: Costs to UK of Military Intervention

Lord Lester of Herne Hill: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What is their current estimate of the public expenditure required by the United Kingdom by way of contribution to the costs of the removal by armed intervention to the present regime in Iraq.

Lord McIntosh of Haringey: The Chancellor announced a contingency reserve of £1 billion in the Pre-Budget Report to help meet our international defence responsibilities. The Ministry of Defence has been drawing down against this amount to meet the cost of military preparation to enforce UN Security Council Resolution 1441. The Chancellor has now announced an additional three-quarters of a billion pounds to be made available in this financial year for further commitments should this prove necessary.

Iraq: Costs to UK of Military Intervention

Lord Lester of Herne Hill: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What is their current estimate of the public expenditure required by the United Kingdom by way of contribution to the costs of securing, policing and stabilising a new government in Iraq during each of the first three years after any removal of the current regime.

Lord McIntosh of Haringey: No such estimate of the costs of such operations over the timescale suggested has been made. If there is a government change in Iraq, the UK Government believe that the role of the United Nations and other multilateral institutions will be vital in addressing the reconstruction of Iraq in the aftermath of any war and are liaising closely with allies on this issue.

Families with Children: Government Policy

Baroness Cox: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether they regard a couple with three or more children as a large family; and whether the United Kingdom has an unofficial two-child policy.

Lord McIntosh of Haringey: The Government have no plans to offer financial or other incentives to couples who have a certain number of children.
	The Government are committed to giving all the nation's children the best start in life and have thus increased financial support for families with children through increased child benefit and the introduction of the integrated child tax credit. The Government's approach is based on providing support for all families with children, combined with offering more help to those who need it most, when they need it most. This includes families on lower incomes, those with children under one and parents of disabled children. Similarly, families with more children are eligible for more support.
	The Government provide more financial support for the first child through child benefit and, from this April, through the family element of the child tax credit.

Uzbekistan

Lord Avebury: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether they will refer to the condition of religious freedom in Uzbekistan in their statement at the forthcoming session of the United Nations Human Rights Commission.

Baroness Symons of Vernham Dean: We are deeply concerned by reports of religious intolerance in Uzbekistan. My honourable friend the Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs raised human rights concerns with the Uzbek ambassador in London on 10 February. Our ambassador in Tashkent drew attention to the issue of religious prisoners in Uzbekistan in a public speech last October.
	The UK, along with all EU partners, supported the Irish resolution on religious intolerance at last year's session of the Commission on Human Rights (UNCHR), and we cosponsored a resolution at the UN General Assembly in November last year on the elimination of all forms of religious intolerance.
	We are discussing what action to take on Uzbekistan and other countries with EU partners at this year's session, taking place from 17 March to 25 April.

Weapons of Mass Destruction

Lord Lloyd-Webber: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Which countries in the Middle East, other than Iraq, have weapons of mass destruction.

Baroness Symons of Vernham Dean: We have for some time had concerns about the ambitions of a number of countries in the Middle East to acquire or produce weapons of mass destruction (WMD).
	We continue to urge Israel to resolve international concerns about its nuclear programme by acceding to the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty as a non-nuclear weapons state.
	In the past, we have made public statements of concern about reports that Libya, Syria and Iran are pursuing programmes for the development of WMD and the means for their delivery.
	We regularly urge all states in the region to sign and ratify all the treaties and conventions covering the development of weapons of mass destruction.

Weapons of Mass Destruction

Lord Oakeshott of Seagrove Bay: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What is their current definition of weapons of mass destruction.

Baroness Symons of Vernham Dean: There is no universally accepted definition of the phrase "weapons of mass destruction", but it is generally held to refer to nuclear, chemical and biological weapons.

Weapons of Mass Destruction

Lord Oakeshott of Seagrove Bay: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether they believe that Egypt possesses weapons of mass destruction.

Baroness Symons of Vernham Dean: We have no evidence to suggest that Egypt possesses weapons of mass destruction.

Weapons of Mass Destruction

Lord Oakeshott of Seagrove Bay: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether they believe that Iran possesses weapons of mass destruction.

Baroness Symons of Vernham Dean: There have been long-standing concerns about Iran's ambitions to pursue a nuclear weapons programme.
	We regularly urge all states to sign and ratify all the treaties and conventions covering the development of weapons of mass destruction.
	The United Kingdom has consistently supported resolutions at the United Nations calling for the creation of a Middle East zone free of weapons of mass destruction.

Weapons of Mass Destruction

Lord Oakeshott of Seagrove Bay: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether they believe that Israel possesses weapons of mass destruction.

Baroness Symons of Vernham Dean: We regularly urge Israel to resolve international concerns about its nuclear status by acceding to the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty as a non-nuclear weapons state and to enter into a full safeguards agreement with the IAEA. We also use our regular bilateral contacts with them to raise the issue of Israeli accession to the Chemical Weapons Convention and the Biological and Toxin Weapons Convention.
	The UK has consistently supported resolutions in the United Nations calling for the establishment of a Middle East zone free of weapons of mass destruction.

Weapons of Mass Destruction

Lord Oakeshott of Seagrove Bay: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether they believe that Saudi Arabia possesses weapons of mass destruction.

Baroness Symons of Vernham Dean: We have no evidence to suggest that Saudi Arabia possesses weapons of mass destruction.

Iraq: Consequences of Military Action

The Earl of Sandwich: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether, in the event of a war in Iraq, they have calculated the cost of the damage to (a) United Kingdom trade and international development in the Middle East and Africa, including the loss of important contracts; (b) aid partnerships; and (c) diplomatic ties over the next two years.

Baroness Symons of Vernham Dean: No decision has been made to take military action against Iraq. We have at all stages during this crisis considered the options carefully with our allies, taking account of all the circumstances. It was acting in this spirit which enabled us to secure the unanimous support of the United Nations Security Council for Resoution 1441.

Iraq: Democracy and Human Rights

Lord Lester of Herne Hill: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether it is a condition of their support for the removal by armed intervention of the present regime in Iraq that, after any regime change, the occupying powers would seek to ensure that the new government is democratically elected and that government is conducted under the rule of law; and
	Whether it is a condition of their support for the removal by armed intervention of the present regime in Iraq that, after any regime change, the occupying forces would seek to ensure that the new government respects the human rights of the inhabitants of Iraq.

Baroness Symons of Vernham Dean: No decision has been taken to launch military action against Iraq. Our policy remains to ensure Iraq complies with its obligations under relevant Security Council resolutions, including by giving up its weapons of mass destruction. As I said in my 7 January Statement on our Iraq policy objectives (WA 180), we would like Iraq to become a stable, united and law-abiding state, within its present borders, co-operating with the international community, no longer posing a threat to its neighbours or to international security, abiding by all its international obligations and providing effective and representative government for its own people.

Belarus

Lord Avebury: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether, following the reopening of the Organisation for Security and Co-operation in Europe (OSCE) office in Belarus, and the announcement by the new OSCE Ambassador Eberhard Heyken that he would monitor and report on institution-building, they will propose that the OSCE should offer assistance to non-governmental institutions concerned with free and fair elections in advance of the forthcoming elections.

Baroness Symons of Vernham Dean: The arrival of Ambassador Heyken as head of office only on February 10 has left little time for the OSCE to engage in such activity before the elections on 2 March. However, Her Majesty's Government fully expect the new office in Minsk to address the issue of free and fair elections as part of its new mandate.

Cyprus

Lord Hughes of Woodside: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What action is being taken to help secure a settlement in Cyprus.

Baroness Symons of Vernham Dean: The Goverment's aim remains a comprehensive settlement in time for a reunited Cyprus to accede to the European Union on 16 April. For this to happen, the UN has set 28 February as the deadline for a decision on the Secretary-General's proposals. On Sunday 23 February, Kofi Annan put forward ideas to the two sides on how he might revise his 10 December proposals and consulted the governments in Ankara and Athens before his historic visit to Nicosia. President-elect, Mr Tassos Papadopoulos, has made clear that the change of government under way in Cyprus will not impede the UN timetable. The UK has supported the UN throughout this process and has welcomed the balanced and comprehensive settlement proposals tabled by the Secretary-General. We urge both sides now to secure a settlement.
	During the intensive negotiations which followed the Copenhagen European Council, it became clear that the issue of territorial readjustment was a key one, needing to be resolved if there was to be a settlement. In particular, it became clear that both sides attached great importance to adjustments which represented a relatively small percentage of the area of Cyprus. The Government therefore gave urgent consideration to whether we could in some way help to bridge the remaining gap. A decision was reached to inform the UN Secretary-General that Britain would be prepared to cede part of the UK's sovereign base areas, and this offer has now been included in the UN Secretary-General's ideas of 23 February.
	The offer consists of 45 square miles—just under half of the total area of the SBAs. This makes up 1.2 per cent of the area of the new state of affairs in Cyprus. The areas involved would bring a number of Cypriots living near Limassol, and in the Dhekelia sovereign base area, within the administration of their respective constituent state. It will also open up areas of coastline for possible development. The areas involved do not contain military infrastructure, and this offer will not have any adverse impact on the functioning of the SBAs. The offer would only become valid if there were agreement by both sides to the UN's proposals. And, of course, legislation would be introduced to bring the transfer of territory into operation. In the event that either side in Cyprus rejects the proposals, or the proposals are rejected in a referendum by either side, the offer, along with the rest of the UN proposals, will become null and void.
	We urge both sides not to let this historic opportunity to heal the division of Cyprus slip away; and to go the last mile to conclude negotiations and secure the settlement.

Hong Kong

Baroness Ramsay of Cartvale: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	When they will publish the next report to Parliament on Hong Kong and the Sino-British Joint Declaration.

Baroness Symons of Vernham Dean: The 12th report on the implementation of the Sino-British Joint Declaration on Hong Kong was published today and copies have been placed in the Library of the House. A copy of the report is also available on the Foreign and Commonwealth Office website (www.fco.gov.uk). The report includes a foreword by my right honourable friend the Foreign Secretary. I commend the report to the House.

Flue Gas Desulphurisation Plants

Lord Lofthouse of Pontefract: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What account is taken of the running costs of flue gas desulphurisation plants in the market for electricity generation to ensure that these plants are not at a commercial disadvantage to plants without abatement equipment.

Lord Sainsbury of Turville: In England and Wales, the Environment Agency regulates power generation plants through the integrated pollution control regime. The agency applies the best available techniques not entailing excessive cost (BATNEEC) on a site by site basis. BATNEEC balances the cost to the operator against the benefits to the environment.
	However, in England and Wales the Environment Agency is reviewing the current regulatory framework to assess whether plants fitted with FGD are commercially disadvantaged relative to non-FGD plants. Depending on the outcome of the review, further conditions may be imposed on unabated plants to ensure the emissions of sulphur dioxide per gigawatt hour more closely align with those from plants fitted with FGD operating at a high load factor.

Export Certificates for Animal Health Products

Baroness Byford: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Which division of the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs has taken over responsibility from the former Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food Arable Crops Division for issuing export certificates for animal health products; whether the target turnaround period is still five working days from receipt of the application to issue of the certificate; and what proportion of certificates are issued within this period.

Lord Whitty: Within Defra a number of divisions, including the Arable Crops Division, are responsible for issuing certificates of free sale for a wide range of food and feed products. Defra's agencies are responsible for issuing similar certificates for pesticide and veterinary medicinal products. This service is offered free of charge to assist exporters in meeting the needs of importing countries for official statements on the status of products in the UK.
	In addition, Defra's International Animal Health Division is responsible for the preparation of export health certificates for live animals and products of animal origin. It is sometimes the case that an export health certificate in respect of a non-EU country is not available. In these instances it can take some time to obtain the import conditions from the country concerned and agree the detail of the certificate. Once an export health certificate is available, the State Veterinary Service is in most cases responsible for issuing it to an exporter.
	Over 97 per cent of relevant certificates are processed within five working days of receipt of applications.

Green Claims Code

Baroness Miller of Chilthorne Domer: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	How they measure the effectiveness of the Green Claims Code they introduced in 1998; in what ways they are deterring bad practice with regard to green claims; and how many times since 1998 they have done so; and
	In what ways they support the efforts of businesses which are acting responsibly on green claims.

Lord Whitty: The Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs commissions market surveys to assess the effectiveness of the Green Claims Code. We have commissioned two since its publication. The first, The Green Claims Code: is it working?, was carried out in 1999 by the National Consumer Council (available on the NCC's website at www.ncc.org.uk/pubs/green.htm). The second, A survey of environmental claims and declarations made on consumer products, was carried out in 2001 by Ecotec Research and Consulting (available on the department's website at www.defra.gov.uk/environment/consumerprod/accpe/research/index.htm).
	The general findings are that only a small proportion of products in the market offer any form of environmental declaration. Where claims are actually made the quality varies considerably. The most recent survey indicated that about half met the standards in the code, but about 40 per cent did not and about 10 per cent were borderline.
	There are regulatory and advisory measures which serve to deter bad practice in green claims. Legislation is available to deal with claims which are demonstrably false or misleading under the Control of Misleading Advertising Regulations 1988 and the Trade Descriptions Act 1968. No information is collected centrally about cases brought under this legislation. The Green Claims Code also advises on practice which should be avoided by those placing information on the market.
	The Green Claims Code is also designed to help business make good green claims by giving advice on best practice. As well as issuing and promoting the code, we have published a consumer information leaflet (Hi I'm Green) which provides advice to the public on what claims to look out for and how to take up claims they think are unhelpful or misleading. Together the code and leaflet will increase consumer awareness about the standard of information they should expect and should start to demand from manufacturers and retailers; and will help consumers to identify which businesses are performing to a good standard.

NHS Professionals

Lord Campbell-Savours: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether all National Health Service trusts are working successfully with NHS Professionals; and
	What progress has been made in developing NHS Professionals as a bank of health professionals.

Lord Hunt of Kings Heath: The extension of NHS Professionals has progressed rapidly to a very tight timescale and against a background of substantial structural change across the NHS. An NHS solution built on the NHS Professionals concept of managing in-house temporary staff consistently across health economies, underpinned by tight agency framework agreements, remains the goal. Fifty-five NHS trusts are making full use of NHS Professionals.

Connswater River

Lord Laird: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Further to the Written Answer by the Lord Privy Seal on 28 January (WA141) concerning Connswater River, when the study of pollution management will be completed; and what steps they propose to take in the interim.

Lord Williams of Mostyn: Discussions are under way between the Environment and Heritage Service of the Department of the Environment and the Water Service of the Department for Regional Development to agree the scope of the proposed urban pollution management study on the Connswater sewerage system. It is hoped to begin the study in the near future and it is expected to take up to two years to complete.
	In the interim, the Water Service has improved the screening of storm discharges at the Sydenham pumping station by installing 6mm fine screens. This work should address the problem of sewage-related debris from the pumping station.

North/South Implementation Bodies

Lord Laird: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What was the block grant from them and from the Government of the Republic of Ireland to the cross-border implementation bodies during 2002; how much was underspent by each body; and to which exchequer and in what proportion the underspend is allocated.

Lord Williams of Mostyn: The information requested, relating to allocations made by the two governments to the north/south implementation bodies in 2002 is set out in the table below. Funding is drawn down to meet authorised expenditure as required.
	As the final accounts for the north/south implementation bodies for 2002 are not complete it is not possible to provide details of expenditure for that year.
	
		Allocations to each implementation body in 2002.
		
			 Body DOF/DFP agreed allocations in millions  NI Executive allocation millions  Irish Government allocation millions 
			  E £ E £ E £ 
			 Waterways Ireland 36.00 21.26 5.02 2.97 30.98 18.30 
			 Language Body 20.28 11.97 6.28 3.71 14.00 8.27 
			 Food Safety Promotion Board 8.40 4.96 2.52 1.49 5.88 3.47 
			 Trade and Business Development Body 16.12 9.52 5.37 3.17 10.75 6.35 
			 Special EU Programmes Body 2.96 1.75 1.48 0.87 1.48 0.87 
			 Foyle, Carlingford and Irish Lights Commission 4.84 2.86 2.42 1.43 2.42 1.43

Websites

Lord Morris of Manchester: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether they consider that referring members of the public to websites for advice, for instance on travel to unstable countries or on types of hospital infection, is sufficient when many people do not have access to personal computers.

Lord Macdonald of Tradeston: The Government refer members of the public to websites where these are considered to be the most comprehensive source of information on a particular topic. However, we also recognise that some people are unable to, or prefer not to, access the Internet and therefore offer information and advice of equal quality via alternative routes, including government offices, telephone help lines, publications and ceefax.

Capita Group: Cabinet Office Contracts

Baroness Blatch: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What contracts have been awarded to the Capita Group by the Cabinet Office.

Lord Macdonald of Tradeston: The Cabinet Office currently has two contracts with Capita Business Services Ltd, which is part of the Capita Group. These are for fast stream recruitment support and for provision of Civil Service and judicial pensioner payroll and associated services.

Cabinet Office Spring Supplementary Estimates

Lord Campbell-Savours: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	When they will publish the Cabinet Office spring supplementary estimate 2002–03.

Lord Macdonald of Tradeston: Subject to parliamentary approval of any necessary supplementary estimate, the Cabinet Office DEL will be increased by £16,549,000 from £261,159,000 to £277,708,000, the gross administration costs limit will be increased by £4,514,000 from £164,613,000 to £169,127,000 and the net administration costs limit will be decreased by £1,847,000 from £2,922,000 to £1,075,000. Within the DEL change, the impact on resources and capital are as set out in the following table:
	
		
			  Resources £000 Capital £000 
			 Change 2,122 14,427 
			 New DEL 208,566 69,142 
			 Of which: 
			 Voted 208,566 69,142 
			 Non-voted 
		
	
	The change in the resource element of the DEL arises from machinery of government transfers of £2,018,000 to other departments; a virement from capital of £4,000,000; additions from the Invest to Save budget of £280,000; and net transfers to other government departments of £140,000. The change in the capital element of the DEL arises from additions from the DEL reserve of £9,000,000; transfers from other departments of £6,087,000; a transfer to the security and intelligence agencies of £385,000; draw-down of capital end-year flexibility of £4,125,000; virement to resource of £4,000,000; and the difference of £400,000 between expenditure using proceeds from the sale of assets and the net book value of the assets.